Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility: Difference between revisions

I have been working on revising the articles on rulers of the Mali Empire, which often have inconsistently structured titles, and I believe it would be a good idea to try and reach some kind of consensus about what format is preferable. This seems to be the most appropriate WikiProject at which to have this discussion. There are seven different naming conventions that were in use before I started working on these articles (I have already requested moves for some of these, so the titles are not necessarily the same now):

• "[name] Keita": Keita is the jamu, or clan, to which the mansas of Mali are said to belong. It does not seem to me that any of the mansas of Mali are routinely called "[name] Keita" in reliable sources, except for Sunjata.
  • Sundiata Keita
• "Mansa [name]": Mansa is the Manding word for "king", and the title by which the rulers of the Mali Empire are known.
  • Mansa Musa
• "[name] Mansa": as above, except with the order reversed for some reason.
  • Sakoura Mansa
• "[name] (mansa)": as above, but using parenthetical disambiguation.
  • Suleyman (mansa), Kassa (mansa), Sandaki (mansa), Mahmud II (mansa), Mahmud IV (mansa)
• "[name] ibn [father]": using Arabic patronymics, which is how the names are often given in the Arabic primary sources.
  • Mohammed ibn Gao
• "[name] of Mali": following the conventions established at
  WP:NCROY
  primarily for European royalty.
  • Uli I of Mali, Mari Djata II of Mali, Musa II of Mali, Musa III of Mali
• "[name]": Some just have an unaltered name with an ordinal.
  • Maghan I, Maghan II, Maghan III, Uli II, Mahmud III

Though it's not relevant to this discussion, note that many of the spellings here need revision (e.g. Kassa is a non-standard transcription of قسا (Qasā), which is one of several manuscript variants along with قنبا (Qanbā) for the same name).

Sunjata and Mansa Musa are well-known enough to be subject to

This leaves "[name] of Mali" and "Mansa [name]" as the two best name formats I can think of. Despite

One final note is that I'm not sure how appropriate the use of ordinals is here, as they seem to be only intermittently used by historians and are not present in the primary sources. What's the policy around here for applying ordinals to monarchs in societies where they were not traditionally used?

Does anyone here have any thoughts or suggestions on this matter? Pinging Doug Weller and Catjacket, both of whom I have interacted with previously on topics pertaining to the Mali Empire, and I'm going to leave notes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mali as well. Ornithopsis (talk) 04:11, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ancillary to this discussion, I think Kassi (wife of Suleyman of Mali) needs to be renamed for several reasons, but I'm not sure of the best way to do it either. Ornithopsis (talk) 05:34, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right now the

I'm interested in hearing other perspectives, but at this point in time it looks to me as if it needs to be almost completely overhauled. --Kbabej (talk) 22:24, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This analysis looks very reasonable to me. —JBL (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a stab at removing the glaring promo material, press releases, and obvious OR. I'm not sure how reliable the Pasifika Artists source is, given it's her management company. Different websites had all copied the bio they created, so I removed those and replaced with the original. Given WP is using the management company four times in a short article, ideally other sources will be found. Overall, the article doesn't appear that strong once all the promo is stripped away. --Kbabej (talk) 23:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found the section on her claim to be overly technical and somewhat opaque, so I have tried to replace it with a simpler version - we don't have to present her exact argument or detailed counter arguments, just the general idea of it. (wouldn't object to its removal in its entirety, though) Agricolae (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We need to be careful about what she is claiming. Based on the cited source, she claims that her mother was named aliʻi nui (monarch) by a sovereignty group, and that her mother in turn nominated her as kuhina nui (something like regent), naming Owana's son as aliʻi nui. The source portrays Owana as supporting this family claim to the crown, not a personal claim, so I think we need to be more nuanced in how we refer to this in the lede (if we even mention it - if she is not claiming the crown for herself, it makes it even less lede-worthy). Agricolae (talk) 15:12, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Agricolae: That's an interesting distinction I hadn't thought of. I'd support editing it to make it match what the source is actually saying. I couldn't find any actual RS that state she is a claimant to the crown. --Kbabej (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is confounded by Owana's own web page (non-WP:RS), in which she claims to be 'head of the royal family', with her son as her heir, blurring the distinction (it is unclear if her claim has evolved over time since our cited source, or if this represents intentional obfuscation). I am not sure how best to represent this ambiguous situation. Agricolae (talk) 17:40, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we can use that though, per

WP:BLPSELFPUB as it fails the "unduly self serving" test. Claiming you are the head of a royal house is probably as self serving as you can get. --Kbabej (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Yeah, I get the problem with WP:SPS for self-puffery, but we are already making a direct statement in the lede of what the claim is, and the question is one of accuracy. It would be unduly self-serving were we to add to our article a statement about the claim based solely on an SPS, but that is not the situation here. Rather, we are already reporting that some sort of claim is being made, and in such circumstances it is not uncommon to use an SPS by the subject in order to make sure Wikipedia is not misrepresenting their actual position. My personal preference, however, would be to take it out of the lede entirely. Agricolae (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that. --Kbabej (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

-

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI that this script has been invaluable in cleaning up the extremely abundant trash sources from nobility articles, since all you have to do is scan for pink highlights in the refs. JoelleJay (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for a Wiki article to be created about Plum Tree Memory. The genealogy of the family descends through both parents from King Edward III, both parents through Edmund Crouchback and through King James I, Stewart of Scotland, as well as King Henry VII, of England, 'Prince of Wales'

Most of the resource information gathered to support the Plum Tree Memory website is garnered through Wikipedia Articles, however what this Regent considers is that while so many articles are written about living persons, the actual rulers of certain lands, and goverance of crown rights by Marvin and Donna Trogstad are omitted from history.

Donna Rae Burns descends from the Pamunkey Tribe and Barack Obama and Elizabeth II utilized the resources of Wikipedia and other governing bodies of the United States to offer the Pamunkey Tribe written about in many articles found in Wikipedia, provisional sovereignty of 1200 acres of land of the Chesapeake Bay Region.

There is much ommission going on within the written articles of Wikipedia and there is promotion of persons who are de facto rulers, such as King Philip VI, of Spain' who is being paid large sums of money by the United States via Betty McCollum, Congresswoman of the 4th District of Minnesota, to rule land that rightfully belongs to the family members of Plum Tree Memory.

Many writers in Wikipedia are overlooking this glaring reality, I believe because they are being supported or forced to due to the descendancy of certain prominent black members of society who want to control land, revenue and real-property of the District of Columbia, that of which Marvin and Donna Trogstad have sole authority over.

It appears through financial favortism in the lay community, i.e. job security, etc., through political bodies, i.e. voting priviledges, Bill Clinton Hillary Clinton using members of society such as my ex-husband who worked at Blue Cross Blue Shield, of Eagan those connections with Hillary's creating a 'new healthcare system', this was all to throw a smoke-screen using persons such as Monica Lewinski [1] who has only the accusation of being a White House Intern and a supposed secret lover of the President, William Clinton, you can see Monica Lewinski is even provisioned a Wikipedia Article along with her cohort, Jennifer Flowers [2]. Two individuals who caused an incredible ruckus in our policital season of the Clinton Administration. They are clearly not well connected to anything except a contrived liason with the President, yet articles are written of them. It is likely these individuals were aware of the rights to asscension of governance for the Plum Tree Memory family members and as stated created a smoke screen.

It is my opionion that this Presidential Administration others before and long after, including George W. Bush, and Barack Obama were aware of the demographic regions that should have been ruled by different powers, as stated, "Plum Tree Memory"

Wikipedia writers write much about my family and defiantly deny us the priviledge of revenue and governance and provision others who should not have been with this priviledge.

Jodi Rae (talk)JodiRae63